4621536

7/30/2019 4621536

1/18

Giorgio Agamben and the New Biopolitical Nomos

Author(s): Claudio MincaSource: Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, Vol. 88, No. 4 (2006), pp. 387-403Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Swedish Society for Anthropology and GeographyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4621536 .

Accessed: 29/07/2013 14:29

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Wiley and Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve

and extend access to Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 129.15.14.53 on Mon, 29 Jul 2013 14:29:13 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=swedishhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4621536?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4621536?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=swedishhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black

7/30/2019 4621536

2/18

GIORGIO AGAMBEN AND THENEW BIOPOLITICAL NOMOS

byClaudio Minca

Minca, C., 2006: Giorgio Agambenand the new biopoliticalnomos. Geogr. Ann., 88 B (4): 387-403.ABSTRACT.nthispaper reflecton theprogressive ormali-zationof a seriesof geographiesf exceptionwithinWestern e-mocracies nd, nparticular,he relation f these o the new bio-politicalpower hat s progressivelyffirmingtself nourevery-day ives- and hatappearso be imposingtself as thenew,se-cret,ontologyof thepolitical.

I do so by engagingwiththe workof GiorgioAgamben nd,specifically, nterrogatinghespatialarchitecturehatunderpinshistheoryof sovereign ower.StartingromAgamben's patial onceptualizations,explorehisattempto trace he contours nd he secret oordinates f thecontemporaryiopolitical omos,a nomosrooted irmly n thecrisisandprogressive emolition f thatwhichCarlSchmittde-scribed s the uspublicum uropaeum.note,moreover, owthedefinitivedissolution f thegeographicalomos hathaddomi-nated he two centuries recedinghe FirstWorldWar,andthelack of a new, alternative, eographical omos n the centurywhich ollowed,can also begrasped ycritically ereadingomekeyepisodesnthehistory f European eography;nparticular,thecontestedegacyof theworkof Friedrich atzel'sgrand eo-graphical roject nd heGeopolitikxperiment.What suggests that o understandhedeepnature f thegeo-graphies f exceptionhatarm heglobalwaronterror,t is vitalthatwe think ntermsof atheory f space n order otry ounveilthearcanum,hesecret nigmaof theempty entre roundwhichturn hewheelsof a new,macabre, eo-biopoliticalmachine.Keywords:biopolitics,Agamben, omos,historyof geography,camp

IntroductionOn 7 July2005,five suicideattacks ip hroughheheartof London,striking ts Undergroundn par-ticular.Theattacks eavefifty-four eadandcount-less wounded.On22 July, wo weeksafter he at-tacks,a suspectederrorists shotdownbyapoliceanti-terroristnitafterhavingbeencaptured n theUnderground. hesuspected errorists, in fact,aBrazilian lectricianwho,allegedlyseeinghimselffollowedby plain-clothespolice, decides to fleeand,once reached, s killedwith five shots to thehead.Hisbehaviour ndclothing accordingo theagents,much ooheavyfor the warmLondon em-perature),endered imanhomosacer(Agamben,1995),asuspectederroristwho canbedeliberatelykilled without committing homicide. In the daysthat ollow, hepoliceforwardheirapologies o the

familyfor the unfortunaterrorand reassure hatthey will do everythingn theirpowerto preventsimilarmistakes n the future.At the same time,however, he officialcommuniqu6snsistthat thepreventivemeasureswhichconsent hooting okillsuspects n the head(theso-called OperationKra-tos' - see la Repubblica, 2005a), introduced in thedaysafter heJulyattacks, reabsolutelynecessaryinorder o avertothersuicideattacksandto assuretheprotection f London'scitizenry.JeanCharlesde Menezes,apparentlymarkedoutby his heavyclothing,was killed oprotecthebodyofthepopu-lation/citizenry - of which he, in that specific timeandplace,suddenly easedto bepartof. Thecoun-ter-terrorismmeasures ransformed,n place, theelectrician nto homo sacer, granting he policeagents absolutesovereignpower over him: theright, hat s, to define,within heinstant, hecon-finebetweena life worth ivinganda life thatdoesnotdeserve olive(onsome of thecontroversies e-gardinghepolice'sbehaviourhathaveemergednthesubsequentmonthssee Cowan,2005).Thissovereignpower s only in parta functionof the identitiesof the actors nvolved n thatma-cabrescene; t is, aboveall,theproduct f a spaceof exception - the London Underground - thatgrantedheagents hatextraordinary,rbitrary,e-cisionalpower.Intheory,anyof us acting ike theBrazilian hatdaycouldbe killed withouta crimehavingbeen committed. n a regimeof exception,allof us canbecomepotentialhomines acri fortheveryfactthatwetravelon theUnderground;or thefact that we enter into a vast and extraordinaryspaceof exception extraordinaryrecisely or itsapparent ormality.Within hisspaceof exception,the norm and its transgression re decided in themoment;heystraddle mobileconfine hatwe, ascitizens, are not consentedto know,but thatre-quires us to be ready to die to save ourselves (Cav-alletti,2005).A confinewithrespect o which,atanymoment, anbedecided he threshold etweenour life worth iving- and thatwhich can be sup-pressedwithoutcommittinghomicide.A few months ater n Milan,the Italiancourts

@The author 006 387Journalompilation 2006 SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/30/2019 4621536

3/18

CLAUDIO MINCA

openaninvestigationnto theactivitiesof twenty-two CIA agents, chargedwith having kidnappedanddeported nEgyptianmam n February 003(la Repubblica, 005b).Theaccusations refullysubstantiatedndanarrestwarrants issued ortheagents,causing he Italiangovernmentonsidera-ble embarrassment,s the activitieswere carriedout in violationof Italian awsand, ndeed,Italiannational overeigntylaRepubblica, 005c).Justafew weeks before,Le Monde(Chambraud,005)hadunveileda seriesof other imilarkidnappings'that hadtakenplace in otherEuropean ountriesover thepastcoupleof years,as well as countless'secretflights' hathad transitedwiththeirhumancargo hroughheairports f the OldContinent,nroute o undisclosed ocations(Leseret al., 2005;see also Amaret al., 2005; Staglian6,2005).Theexception o thenorm, o thejuridicalorder n ef-fectwithin henationalerritory,husbecomesnotonly systematic,butpartandparcelof a veritablestrategy f interventionmplicitlyconsented o byEuropean overnmentsLeseret al., 2005,p. 25).Inthe ightof theseevents,weshouldaskourselvesif we are odaywitnessingadefinitive aradigmaticbreak n conceptionsof the relationshipbetweenjuridical-politicalrderand erritory;f we are ac-ingthecreation f anenormous paceof exceptionwithinwhich each andeveryoneof us - in a tem-poraryandarbitraryuspensionof thenorm canbepotentiallywhiskedaway oa secretprison, im-ilarto in thepanopticnightmaremagined o wellinTerryGilliam'sBrazil.Thispaperwillremark pon heprogressive or-malization f a series of geographies f exceptionwithinWesterndemocracies nd, nparticular,herelationof these to the newbiopoliticalnomos hatis progressivelyaffirming tself in our everydaylives- and hatappearso be imposing tself asthenew,secretontologyof thepolitical.Thewritingsof GiorgioAgamben n thesepastyearshavefur-nished a formidablebody of reflectionregardingthedeepnature f exception n contemporary ol-itics.Inparticular,gamben's otionsof homo ac-er andnudavita(bare ife), fundamentalillarsofhis theoryof sovereignty,have stimulated ount-less disciplinary nd nterdisciplinaryebatesandformtodaykeyreferencepointsfor discussionsofthepoliticalgrammarf modernityseee.g.others,Edkinset al., 2004; Norris,2003, 2004a, 2004b;also thespecial ssueof Paragraph ditedby Dil-lon,2002).Yet,despite heenormousmpactof theItalianphilosopher'swork, ittle has been writtenthus far about the spatial architectureof his

thought. t is my firmbelief thatAgamben's heo-reticaledificeshouldbe conceivedof, aboveall,asagrand patial heory; r,betteryet,thatoneofAg-amben'smost mportantntuitionss that heresnopolitics,and thus no political analysis,withoutatheoryof space itis notbychance, nfact,that woof theprincipal eferentsn the elaboration f hisbiopolitical heoryof exceptionare CarlSchmittandMichelFoucault).Theconceptof thespaceofexceptions, indeed,keytoAgamben'sheoreticalapparatus.In thepageswhichfollow,I will tryto demon-stratehow,starting recisely romAgamben's pa-tialconceptualizations,e canbegin oexplorehisattempto trace hecontours nd he secretcoordi-nates of the contemporary iopoliticalnomos,anomos rootedfirmly n the crisis andprogressivedemolitionof that whichCarl Schmitt 1998, pp.161-265) described as the ius publicum Europae-um.I willnote,moreover, owthe definitivedisso-lutionof thegeographical omos hathaddominat-edthetwocenturies recedinghe FirstWorldWar(asdescribed ySchmitt), nd helackof anew,al-ternative, eographicalomos nthecenturywhichfollowed,can also be graspedby critically e-read-ing somekey episodes n thehistoryof Europeangeography;nparticular,hecontestedegacyof theworkof FriedrichRatzel(and, npart, hatof KarlHaushofer).ndeed,bothSchmitt 1998,p.84)andAgamben 2003,p. 48), albeit ndifferentashion,makereferencen theirwritings o theworkof theputative atherof politicalgeography.WhatI willtry to demonstrate ere is thatto understand hedeep natureof the geographiesof exceptionthatarm heglobalwaronterror,t is vitalthatwe thinkintermsof atheoryof space norder otry o unveilthearcanum,he secretenigmaof theemptycentrearoundwhich turn he wheels of themacabre io-politicalmachine;a biopoliticalmachine hatto-day's new global political grammars perhaps,onceagain,attemptingobring o itsextreme on-sequences.I cannothopeto tacklethe entirespatialarchi-tectureofAgamben'shoughthere, or such a taskwouldrequireabook;abookwhich,Ibelieve, t isgeographers'ask to write. WhatI will try to dohere, rather,s to hint at some of the key spatialquestionsraisedby Agamben'swork,with somebrief allusions to Ratzel's grand geographicalprojectandto Haushofer'sGeopolitik xperiment.I will argue hatnotonlyshouldgeography ngagewithAgamben's patial heory,butit shouldalsointerrogateheproductionf a newimplicitglobal

388 ? The author 006Journalompilation 2006SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography


7/30/2019 4621536

4/18

GIORGIO AGAMBEN AND THE NEW BIOPOLITICAL NOMOS

nomos,a new Atlanticnomos hatriskstranslatingitself into a terrifyingbiopoliticalcaesura of thebodyof thenationandof our ndividual odies asthe newdanger voked odayeven n theverybanaldecision to travelon London'sUnderground p-pears o portend.The end of the Europeannomos and thetriumphof exceptionAgamben's onsiderations nthestateofexceptiontake as theirstartingpointthe paradoxof sover-eigntyas presentedby Schmitt.According o theGermanegaltheorist, he sovereign s he (sic) towhom thejuridicalordergrants hepowerto pro-claim the state of exceptionand, thus,to suspendthe order's eryvalidity.Thesovereign,Schmittn-sists, is at thesame timeboth outside and nside- thejuridicalorder(see Agamben,1995, p. 19;1996,p. 84; 2004, pp.33-34). Agamben emarks,inparticular,nthatwhichhedefinesasthe mplicittopologyof theparadoxof sovereignty;hat s, themechanism ywhich hesovereign,possessing helegalmeansto suspend hejuridicalorder,placeshimself(legally)outsideof the law. Thisobserva-tion is keyboth ounderstandinghespatial heoryimplicitnAgamben's wn workbut t is alsoavitalstarting ointformyownattempto rethinkn ex-plicitlygeographicalerms hespatialnature f thatwhichhas been definedasthe newbiopolitical ra.I will begin,therefore,by brieflyconsidering hetwo key spatial-ontological evices thatstructureAgamben's heoryof exception thecampand heban- to then moveon to a discussionof the sup-posed dissolutionof the geographicalnomos de-scribedbySchmitt, uggesting omeways nwhichanunderstandingf thislatterpointcanhelpus tobetterdecipherhegeographies f decision hatap-pear o guideAmerican eo-biopolitics oday.According o Schmitt, here s no normapplica-ble to chaos. To obtain uridical-politicalrder,a'normal'situationmust be created.At the sametime, however,anysuch order s senselesswithoutterritorial rounding and without the meaninggrantedby suchgrounding.n thisoptic,the occu-pationanddenominationf territoryhusbecomethe foundational ntologicalgestures, rom whichall rightsemanate and within which space andright, order and its localization,come together(Schmitt,1998,p. 26).All rights,all laws are thusapplicable nlyto specific'territorialituations'and can only be suspended,with respectto suchspecific 'situations',within the exception. Sch-

mitt's theoryof exceptionis thereforepremiseduponthe recognitionof the necessityof a funda-mentalspatial measure' f the Earth of a spatialtheory startingromwhichbothorderand hesus-pensionof ordergain meaning.Andwhat has al-ways been the preoccupation f geographyandgeographersf notthespatialmeasureof the Earth- a measurewhich,at a certainpoint ntime,cameto be termed'geographical pace' (see Farinelli,2003)?Indeed,hasnotthe mplicitandexplicitdef-initionof territorial rderalwaysbeenanessentialtask of geography? n this sense, Schmitt'sDasNomosvon der Erdereflects nmanywaysthespa-tialontologiesof the Ratzelianproject a projectstrategicallymisreadbytwentieth entury cadem-ic geography.The Schmittianheoryof exceptionupon whichAgamben'sreasoningdraws is thusfirmlyrooted n geographical heory.The essence of sovereignty,Schmittcontinues(1988, evokedbyAgamben,1995,p. 20; 1996,p.84; 2004,p.47), is not themonopolyof sanction rrule,butrather hemonopolyof decision.The ex-ception,whichmakessenseonlywhenclearlyde-finedin spatial erms,revealsthis deepnatureofsovereignauthority.nproclaiminghe stateof ex-ception, he Germanegal. heorist oncludes,sov-ereignauthority emonstrateshat t does not needlawto create aw.Theexception s thusmore nter-estingthannormality:this latterproves nothing,while heexception roves verything...] therulelives only withintheexception' Agamben,1995,p. 20).However,o 'live',therulerequires spatialtheory,a 'measure' f the world thatgrants t ma-terialityandmeaning.The uridical rder does notoriginally present tself simply as sanctioningatransgressive act but instead constitutesitselfthrough herepetition f the same act withoutanysanction,hat s, as anexceptional ase'(Agamben,1995,p. 31; 1998,p.26;see also2004,pp.44-49).Suchrepetition f theexceptionmust,necessarily,be spatialized,or itsveryexistencedependsuponits(concrete)ocationoutsideof the uridical rder,beyond the 'measure'that translatesspace intonorm.The aw,Agamben rgues 1995,p.31; 1998,p. 26; see also2004, p. 54), is renderednto normnot simplybecause t commandsorprescribesbutbecause tmustfirst reate tssphereof referencen'normal'life,t mustnormalizet. Therepetition fan act without sanctionnecessitatesa where;ne-cessitatesatopographyhatallowsfortheground-ing of the (exceptional)act. Suchgroundingn aconcrete paceaims atmakingpossibleanimpos-sible coincidencebetweenthe normand its trans-



7/30/2019 4621536

5/18

CLAUDIOMINCA

gression,placingthem in a zone of indistinctionwherethe exceptiongainsform,meaningandle-gitimation. tis herethat nhabit hesovereignandthe homo acer- and t is within histerrainhatwefindthe roots of today'sgeographies f exception,geographies f exception hatrisktransformingllpoliticsintoa purebiopolitical ask.Theexception s, thus,a kindof exclusion,ac-cording o Agamben 1995, pp. 21-22; 1998,pp.17-18), but whattrulycharacterizesheexceptionis thatwhat s excluded n it is not,for thisreason,withoutrelation o the norm: ndeed,what is ex-cludedin the exceptionremains n relation o thenorm n the form of the latter's uspension 2004,pp. 47-54). Agamben ermsrelationof exceptionthe extreme ormof relationwithin whichsome-thing s includedonly by its exclusion: the situa-tioncreated ntheexceptionhas thepeculiar har-acteristic hat t cannotbe definedeitheras a situ-ationof factoras a situation fright,but nsteadn-stitutes a paradoxical hresholdof indistinctionbetween hetwo'(Agamben,1995,p. 22; 1998,p.18).Froma politicalpointof view,this thresholdrepresentsnotonly thecardinalpointof any geo-graphyof exception,butalso a fundamental as-sagein theproduction f thebodyof thenation,apassage hatcan neverbecomplete(d).Thisthresh-old constitutes,n fact,themost fundamental ae-sura betweennascita(birth) and ife - of an in-dividual ndnazione nation);hat s, thenecessary- thoughalways ncomplete translation f thein-dividual nto a member f agreater, iological-ter-ritorialbody:exhaustive,otalizing,yet always n-complete. will saymoreon thispointsubsequent-ly.In the sovereignexception,Agamben 1995,p.23; 1998,p. 19,emphasisadded; ee also2004, p.47) continues, what s at issue ... is notso muchthe controlorneutralizationf anexcessasthe cre-ationanddefinition f theveryspace in whichthejuridico-politicalordercan havevalidity'.It is inthis sense thatthe exceptionbecomes thatwhichSchmitt erms he 'fundamentalocalization' Or-tung),a spatialdevice that 'does notlimit itself todistinguishingwhat s inside fromwhat s outsidebut nstead racesathresholdthestate-space f ex-ception]between the two, on the basis of whichoutsideand nside,the normal ituation ndchaos,enter nto thosecomplex opologicalrelations hatmakethe validityof thejuridicalorderpossible'(Agamben,1995,p. 23; 1998,p. 19).The 'spatialordering'hatconstitutesor Schmitt hesovereignnomos s not,Agamben 1995,p. 23; 1998,p. 19)

adds,merely'a "takingof land" Landesnahme),the determination f a juridical Ordnung) nd aterritorialOrtung)order but aboveall a "presadel fuori" [a "takingof the outside"],an excep-tion'. And such a presa del fuori is performed,again,on eminentlygeographicalurf; hat s, theterritory nd ts spatial measure'.The entireedificeof Das Nomosvonder Erde sfounded,nfact,upon heanalysis andprospecteddemise of theEuropean omos;hat s, of aglobalspatialorder foundedupon the existence of anenormous paceof exception, heextra-Europeanone; a spacewhere the European rderwas sus-pended,butat the same ime withrespect o whichit was constitutedand found its meaning.Thethresholdof exception s, then,presentedby Ag-ambensince theopeningpagesof Homo Sacerasthe focalpointof anexquisitelygeographicalhe-ory.Thespaceof exceptionconstitutes,orAgam-ben,theoriginalnomos, hefoundinggestureof thepolitical paceofmodernity,heontologicaldevicethat ies at the rootsof the modernnation-statenditspotentialranslationnto abiopoliticalmachine.Thecampis theparadigmof thispolitical space;the structureof the ban its translation ntogeo-graphical erms.

The campIn itsarchetypalorm, he stateof exception sthereforeheprinciple f every uridicalocal-ization, inceonlythe stateof exceptionopensthespace n which the determination f a cer-tainjuridicalorderand a particularerritoryfirst becomespossible.As such, the state ofexception tself is thusessentiallyunlocaliza-ble (even f definite patio-temporalimits canbe assigned o it fromtimeto time).(Agamben,1995,p. 24; 1998,p. 19)Here lies thegeographical rcanum hatanycon-temporaryheoryof exceptionmusttake nto con-sideration andthatAgamben's eflections inallybring o light.The nexus between helocalization(Ortung)and ordering Ordnung)hat constitutethe 'nomos of the Earth' or Schmitt 1998) con-tains within t 'a fundamentalmbiguity, n unlo-calizablezone of indistinction rexception hat, nthe last analysis,necessarilyacts againstit as aprincipleof its infinite dislocation'(Agamben,1995,p. 24; 1998,pp. 19-20). Thisexplainswhy,'whenouragetried ograntheunlocalizable per-manentandvisiblelocalization,heresultwas the

390 @Theauthor 006Journalompilation 2006SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography


7/30/2019 4621536

6/18


concentrationamp'.The campis thusthe spacethat s openedwhen he stateof exceptionbegins obecome heruleandgainsapermanentpatialorm(Agamben,1996,p. 37).The campas a spaceof exception s, in fact,aportionof territorywhich ies outsideof thejurid-ical order but s, nonethe ess, notsimplyaspaceexternal o thatorder.As Gregory 2004a,p. 258)rightlynotes,inthecamp'theexternalandthein-ternalarearticulated ot to erase he outsidebuttoproducet as the serialspacingof theexception, oreverinscribing xclusionthroughnclusion'.Thepoliticalsystem husnolongerorders ormsof lifeandjuridicalrules in a determinate lacebut,in-stead,contains at its very centre whatAgambentermsa 'dislocating ocalization' hatexceeds itand intowhicheveryform of life andeverynormcanbevirtuallyaken.Thecamp,as'dislocatingo-calization',maythusbe seenas the hiddenmatrixof modempolitics:

the birthof thecamp nourtimeappears s anevent hatdecisivelysignals hepoliticalspaceof modernitytself.It is produced tthepointat which the political system of the modernnation-state,whichwas foundedon the func-tionalnexusbetweena determinateocaliza-tion(theterritory) ndadeterminateolitical-juridical rder the State)andmediatedby au-tomatic ulesof theinscription f life (nascitaor nazione),enters n a lastingcrisis,and theStatedecides oassumedirectly he careof thenation'sbiological ife as oneof its tasks.(Agamben,1995,p. 197;1998,pp. 174-175)

Thetransformationf the stateof exception ntoapermanent patial order thuscorrespondso thedefinitive upture f the territorial omosthathadproduced andhadbeenproduced y- themodemEuropean ation-state. nd whiletheaimof Euro-pean bourgeoisgeography1 f the nineteenthandearlydecades of the twentiethcenturyhad beenpreciselyto describe, nscribeandlegitimizethisvery political-institutional-territorialtructure(Agamben'sriadof state-nation-territory),he dis-solutionof theEuropean omos,of theEuropeanglobal order,and the accordantabandonment fany attempt o linklife andrightto a comprehen-sive spatialtheory,will resultin a violent emer-genceof thebiopolitical.Theattempto canceltheambiguityof the originalspatialization ecomes,indeed, hesupreme iopoliticalaskof thenation-state.Thespaceof exception husremainsunloca-

lizableso long as its natureas a threshold s notmadeexplicitwithina concretezone of indistinc-tion- withina geographyof exception with re-spectto whichthe hiddenmatrix hat ies attheor-igin of the campis transformednto a permanentsuspensionof orderand,paradoxically, ecomesthenorm.Findinghe anguage odescribe hisper-manent uspensionandthealmostmysticalnatureof its original spatializations, I believe,geogra-phy'smostpressing asktoday.Today'swar on an unlocalizable errors loca-lizedwith intelligentweapons'and heappearanceof (moreor ess)invisibleprisons prisons hatcer-tainlyexistsomewhere,hough heirexact ocationand nhabitants reunknownGregory,004a).It sforthisreason,perhaps,hat herenderingxplicitof the Guantanamoxperimentsee Butler,2002,2004) is a fundamentaltartingpointfromwhichwe canbegin odecipherhenature f a new nomosthatstruggles o affirm tself as somethingmorethan mere force/action rendered into norm; anomos unable o think tself as spatial heoryandwhich, orthisreason,produceshe conditions hatallowfor the ocalized ranscendencef biopoliticsinto tanatopolitics.This transcendences usuallypresented y sovereignpoweras anerror, failure,a 'crack n theproject'while, in fact,the contem-porarycampis the boundarybetween the insideandthe outsideof theneworderand,as such,mustbe translated nto geography,mustbe territorial-ized. So is whatwe arewitnessing, ndeed, he at-temptof the new nomos o inscribe tselfupontheEarth? f theaimof thepermanenttate of excep-tionis, indeed, o imposea newglobalnomos,canit do so withoutanewspatialheory,withouta new'measure' f the Earth?The banWehavethus seenthatwhile theexception onsti-tutesthe 'deep'structure f sovereignty,t is also'theoriginary tructuren which law refers o lifeand includes t in itself by suspendingt' (Agam-ben, 1995,p. 34; 1998,p. 28).Agamben, ollowingJean-LucNancy, erms he ban thispotenza2 f thelaw'tomaintaintself nitsownprivation',o applyby '(dis)applying'tself. ForAgamben, the rela-tionofexceptions arelation fban'; hat s, anem-inentlyspatial elation:

Hewhohasbeen banneds not,infact,simplyset outsidethe law andmade indifferento itbut is rather bandonedby it, that s, exposed@The author 006 391Journalompilation 2006SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography


7/30/2019 4621536

7/18

CLAUDIO MINCA

andthreatened n the thresholdn whichlifeandthelaw,outsideand nside,become ndis-tinguishable.t is literallynotpossibleto saywhether he one who hasbeen banned s out-side or insidethejuridicalorder.(Agamben,1995,p. 34; 1998,pp.28-29,emphasis n theoriginal)

The werewolf the thresholdigure hatAgambenadopts o explain hegeography f the ban- is, atitsorigin, hefigureof themanbannedbyhis com-munity.His life, tom betweenthe forestandthecity, s not 'apieceof animalnaturewithoutanyre-lation olaw and hecity.Itis, rather, threshold findistinctionandof passagebetween animalandman,betweenphysisandnomos,exclusionand n-clusion'(1995,p. 117; 1998,p. 105).The stateofnature hat his latter mbodies s not, therefore,arealepoch,chronologically rior othefoundationof the City,but a principle nternal o the City'(ibid.).Thedecisive actorhere s that he werewolfdoes notonlymetaphoricallynhabithisthresholdof indistinction;e inhabits ndmoves hroughealspaces, spaceswhich,with his very presenceandhishybridnature,he contributesoproducing.tishere hatAgamben ituateshe 'survival f the stateof natureat the veryheartof the state'(1995, p.119;1998,p. 106),but t is alsohere hat s renderedexplicit(by meansof anoriginalandthus hiddenspatialization)heconfinebetweenbare ife and alife worthliving. Agamben'swerewolf is thus asubject ornnot only between life anddeath,butalso betweenplaceand ts 'measure'space) ex-cludedbybothbut,at the same ime,constitutive fboth.TheBrazilian lectrician hotdownontheLon-donUnderground,n thosefew,decisiveseconds,was thrust nto the conditionof the werewolf;aconditiongeneratednotby his culpability,butbythe exceptionalnatureof the (real,urban)placewithinwhichhehappenedofindhimself.Herewecome, again, to the hidden matrix of the geogra-phies of exception. What defines the condition ofthe homosacer,as we have read n by nowcount-less articles hatadopt his term(see, e.g. Norris,2004b) is 'the double exclusion into whichhe istakenand heviolence o whichhefindshimselfex-posed'(1995,p.91; 1998,p. 82).The homosacer,forAgamben 1995,p.92; 1998,p. 83), representsthe'originaryigureof life taken ntothesovereignban',so faras 'thesovereign pheres thespherenwhich it is permitted o kill withoutcommittinghomicideandwithout elebrating sacrifice, nd a

vita sacra (sacred life) - that is, life that may bekilled but not sacrificed is the life thathasbeencapturedn thissphere.' donothave hespacehereto furtherdevelopthis key point of Agamben'sanalysis;whatIwould iketohighlight,however,sthat he structuref thebanpromptsheItalianphi-losopher o rethink he mythsof the veryfounda-tionof themodemcity,arguinghat

we must learnto recognizethis structure fthe ban in the politicalrelationsand publicspaces nwhichwe still live.... It is thesacrednomos thatconditionsevery rule, the origi-nary spatialization hat governs and makespossibleevery ocalizationandeveryterritori-alization.Andif inmodernityife is moreandmoreclearlyplacedat thecentreof Statepol-itics (which now becomes biopolitics) ... thisis possibleonlybecause herelationof thebanhasconstitutedhe essentialstructure f sov-ereignpower romthebeginning.(Agamben1995,p. 123;1998,p. 111)

When the territorial tate of the ancien regimereconfigurestself as themodern,bourgeoisation-state,thislatter,n its attempto renderpossibleacompromisebetweenits initialrevolutionarym-petusand its subsequent eizure of power, s thisvery structureof theban (which becomes, with thispassage,constitutive f all thepoliticalcategoriesof themodem)thatconsents o thinkof thepopu-lationasabodyand tsmembers scitizens;asbio-logicalparts f thegreater rganism. henationbe-comesthenecessary patializationf thisbody,andgeography, ogetherwith medicine,providethecognitivetools for the description,dentification,organization ndmanagement f its partsanditsconfines.Butthis s nothingparticularlyew.Nonethe less, the structure f the ban reveals how thetranslation f subjects nto citizens s produced ythe reduction f theirbodies ntonumbers,igures,necessary or not)fragments f thepoliticalbodyof thenation(Cavalletti, 005). These bodies be-comepotentially illable,sincetheyarereduced omereelementsof a superior, italorganismwhosepreservation ndpurification ecome one of theprincipaltasks of modem politics; indeed, thestrugglebetweenthe life worth ivingand the lifenot deserving o live of thosecitizens is decidedalong heever-shiftingonfinedefininghebodyofthe nation.As Agamben emindsus, this is thede-cisive confine between zod and bios, betweennomos andphysis, Ordnungand Ortung- a confine

392 ? The author 006Journalompilation 2006SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography


7/30/2019 4621536

8/18


whose definitionwasassignedbythenascentmod-em state othatwhichFarinelli1992)terms bour-geois geography',oftenpresentedas the 'scienceof synthesis'par excellence Capel,1987).To understandullytheconditions hatallowedfor the affirmation f the structure f theban,Ag-ambensuggeststhatwe look back to the Declara-tionof theRightsof ManandCitizenof 1789 as themomentwhich,accordingothephilosopher,anc-tions thepoliticalpassageof sovereigntyo the na-tion-state:withtheDeclaration,heprinciple f allsovereigntyomesto reside n thenation preciselybecauseit has already nscribed his element ofbirth nascita]ntheveryheart f thepoliticalcom-munity' Agamben,1995,p. 141; 1998,p. 128;seealso1996,p.23).Thenazione nation),hatderivesetymologicallyfrom nascere (to be born), thuscompletes he circleopenedby thenascita(birth).Birthtself, n thisregime, husmarks urentryntothe nationandoursubjectiono its sovereignpow-er.Bare ifeis thus nscribedwithin henation'spo-liticizationof thecorpusof its citizens(Agamben,1995,p. 143; 1996,p.24).Thenation-state,ydis-tinguishingbetweenan 'authentic'ife and a barelife - a life stripped f any politicalvalue- trans-formsthe fundamental uestion'whatis French(Italian,English...)' into an essential politicalquestion;a question hat,withNazism,will cometocoincide immediatelywith thehighestpoliticaltask'(Agamben,1995,p. 146; 1998,p. 130).Inhis(sic)ascent opower,hemodern ourgeoissubjecthusmobilizes he deaof nationas a crucialspatial-ontologicaleviceandalso,thankso thetri-umphof positivistgeography ndthefailureof theErdkunderoject see Farinelli,1992,2003), endsupconceiving f thisvery nation)paceasgiven,asnatural.The mystiqueof the nation,once spatial-ized,allowsfor thedirect nterventionnto the bio-politicsof the bodiesof thecitizens;citizenswho,withtheirbare ife andtheirpolitical ife, makeupthebodyof the state.Thenation-statehusbecomesamythical iological ombinationf nature ndcul-ture.Theconditions or theproductionf thedefin-itive relation f indistinction etween ife andpoli-tics werethusalreadyn anembryonic tate n thegeographical onceptionof the bourgeoisnation-state.The atal ompromiseetweenacartographic-geometricalheoryof spaceand heparallel mpha-sis on individual ights hat ormed heideologicalbasisof thenascent tatewouldhave,however, eenimpossibleo sustain orlong,basedas it wasupona specialeffect,upona metaphysics f powerthatwould,sooneror later, nevitablyrevealits most

purelybiopoliticalnature.Thefragilityof this im-plicitcompromisewouldemergewithvirulence f-ter the GreatWar, ransforming also with theaidof 'normal'positivistgeographysee, e.g. Demat-teis,1985) all citizens ntopotential omines acri.TheFirstWorldWar,accordingo both SchmittandAgamben,marks ndeed he definitive uptureof theiuspublicumEuropaeumnd withit, of thenomosof theEarth, f thegrand patialproject hatlayat tsorigin.Thenexusbetween he uridical-po-liticalorderand erritoryhatsustained heoriginalspatializationthearcanum f sovereign ower isthusbrokenandtherepressedcarto(rift)betweennascitaandnaziones dramaticallyevealed,osingits original self-regulating unction (Agamben,1995,pp.42-44; 1996,pp.24-29). It s thus hat as-

cism and Nazismappear: iopolitical egimesparexcellence(togetherwith the state-socialist neswhich wouldfollow)which renderexplicit, n themostviolentof fashions,heplaceof bare ife in theconstitution f thenation-state. hespatio-temporalconfinesof the(juridicallyare)spaceof exceptionaredefinitively reached ndcometocoincidewiththe 'normal' rder,withinwhich iterally verythingbecomespossible(ibid.).It is here that hegrandprojectof thebourgeoisnation-state evealsall its shortcomings;boveall,thatof the fictitious ompromise ponwhich ts ter-ritorialmythis founded,a mythdestined o suc-cumb o its ownbiopoliticalmatrix.Thereproduc-tionof the 'biologicalbodyof the nation' hus be-comes the supreme askof the state,and the nor-malization of exception its most immediatepolitical grammar. his 'biologicalbody'is also,however,an inescapablygeographicalbody thatrenders nseparablehe national erritory ndtheindividualswho inhabit t, now transformedntomere 'population'.Institutionalgeographyhaslong struggled o give form andmeaningto thisbody; thaslongbeen ts taskto furnish t with sta-ble and reassuring representations Dematteis,1985),and t is here thatFriedrichRatzel's essonis particularlynstructive.Ratzel's egacycan, in-deed, tell us much about the definitivepassagethroughwhich the worldproducedby the bour-geois nation-state,having abandoned he globalspatial heory hat ayat the bases of the iuspubli-cumEuropaeum,ntrusts tselftoanorderwithoutlocalization to theabstractpaceof theeconomy- yetwithout ncluding his latterwithinanew,al-ternative omosof theEarth.Ratzel,as we shallsee, is perhapshe lastgeog-raphero think n termsof a territorial omos,and

@Theauthor 006 393Journalompilation 2006SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography


7/30/2019 4621536

9/18

CLAUDIO MINCA

his failure ragically eflects hedefinitive ransla-tionof the nation-statento a biopoliticalmachine- in force butwithout ignificance,hatcannotbutassumeas itssupremeask he controlandmanage-mentof thebiological ife of thepopulation nd tsmembers. The definitive disappearanceof the'Subjectof geography' echoingFarinelli's2003)arguments)hus coincideswiththedisappearanceof theseparation etweennascitaandnazione,be-tweenphysisandnomos,between ife and hemap.In thisway,the nation-statewill be ableto extendsovereignpoweroverbothnomosandphysis.Afewyearslater,Vidal de la Blache'snew GeographieHumaine 1903, 1922)andPassarge'sLandschaft-skunde1919)will aimtoprovidehispassagewitha new languageanda definitiveegitimation.Theimplicitlycartographicogic thatguidesthese twoprojects,andthedisappearancef thegeographerastheexplicitlypoliticalsubject hatcharacterizesboth,serves odefinitivelyranslatehe(notionof)territoryntoamerecontainerorobjectsandpeo-ple, thuscontributingo naturalizinghe ius soli asa natural andno longerpolitical order.From hatmomenton, thebiopoliticalmachinewill spinaround centre hat s nomore,renderingthe purification f the bodyof the nation ts ulti-mate mmanentask,a taskthat,at thispoint,can-not have imits;atask hat, ather,estsupon he n-finiteandarbitrary obilityof such imits.Modemspatial-geometricalonceptions f stateandsocie-ty and hecartographicogicthatguides hemthusbecometheultimate xpressionof aprojectbasedupona purificationwithoutcontent,upona spacewithouta nomos. t is sothat hemapcomes torep-resent, tilltoday,amitologemamythologeme),nideal- to be reached houghalwaysunreachableterritorial olitical orm;anillusoryreignover theEarth, o borrowSchmitt's 1998,p. 15)words.In such a regime of/in force without signifi-cance, the biological becomes immediatelyandnecessarilypolitical,andgeopoliticsandbiopoli-tics become confounded,become one and thesame: 'thepolice now becomespolitics, andthecareof life coincideswiththefightagainst he en-emy' (Agamben,1995, p. 163; 1998,p. 147; seealso 1996,pp.83-86), theconceptof population,spatialdevice(Cavalletti, 005), while thedefini-tionof bare ife,pure,unmediated iopolitics.Andwhen life and politics, 'originallydivided, andlinked ogetherby ... the stateof exception',cometogether, all life becomes sacredand all politicsbecomes the exception' Agamben,1995,p. 165;1998,p. 148).

Lebensraum... Inthehistoryof Western cience,theisola-tion of ... bare ife is a fundamental vent.

(Agamben,2005, p. 393)In L'aperto 2003), Agambenhighlightshow theresearchof JakobvonUexkull,consideredone ofthe founders f modern cology,followedby justafew yearsthepioneeringwork of PaulVidalde laBlache (1903) on the relationsbetweenpopula-tions and theirenvironment, ndthe researchofFriedrichRatzel(1897) on the conceptof leben-sraum.Theworkof VidalandRatzel,asAgambennotes,was to 'profoundly evolutionize he disci-plineof humangeography'2003,p. 48), contrib-utingto transforming,n fundamentalashion, hetraditionallyonceivedrelationbetween ivingbe-ings andtheirenvironment-world.gamben's ef-erenceto theseimportanturningpoints n the dis-ciplineexpresseshis conviction hatthereexists adirectrelationbetween he evolutionof geograph-ical thoughtand the rise of the biopoliticalstate.RecallingRatzel's heorization f thestate's eben-sraum,Agambennoteshow thisconceptionwouldfind ts echoesinNazigeopolitics,while intheVi-dalianprojecthe envisions hefirst ormalizationfacertainunderstandingf therelations etweenen-vironmentandsociety,an understandinghat ac-cording o him wasto furnisha specific, 'ecologi-cal' visionof life,allowing or its eventual otalex-clusion/inclusionwithin hepoliticsof thestate.AndreaCavalletti,whose 2005 book La cittiibiopolitica is largely inspired by Agamben'swork, seven more orceful ntracing he linksbe-tween Ratzel'sspatialtheoryandthe emergenceof thebiopoliticalstate.In his readingof theGer-mangeographer'swork,Cavallettistresseshow,comparedo thecosmological speculationsof hispredecessorsHumboldtandRitter,Ratzel(1897,1907, 1914)endsupradicalizingheidea of total-ity:whatmatters, orRatzel, 'is the [ideaof] ter-restrialspace as both generic and limited vitalspace, as the totality of the necessary relationproper oevery iving being,a totality owhichhewill givethe nameof oecumene' Cavalletti, 005,p. 205). Cavallettinotes, indeed,how in Ratzel'sthought merges he contrast etween he 'ebb andflow of life, which knows no rest', and the un-changingspacesof the Earth. t is from this fun-damental contradiction that the 'struggle forspace' is born, as described n this well-knownpassagefrom thegeographer'swork:

394 @ Theauthor 006Journalompilation 2006 SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography


7/30/2019 4621536

10/18

GIORGIOAGAMBEN AND THE NEW BIOPOLITICAL NOMOS

...life subjectedtself to theEarth,but once itreachedtsconfines, t ebbedback ... onto thepath alreadytaken. Since then, everywhereandwithoutrespite, ife struggleswith life forspace.The much-abusedxpression struggleforexistence" ignifies,aboveall,thestrugglefor space.Indeed, t is spacethatgrantsnormandmeasureo all otherconditionsof life.

(Ratzel,1907,p. 718;emphasisadded)Life, n thiscase, sbiological ife,Cavalletti2005,p. 206) insists,which s definedas such ncontrastto the nert, o non-life andwhichacquirestsspe-cificspatial haractert the momentnwhich,hav-ingtouched he insurmountableimitsof theEarth,it ebbs back into itself (Ratzel,1907, 1914). It isfrom his momentonthat helinkbetween ife andterritorys nolongerpresentedn thetraditionalo-litical-geographicnderstanding,ut s read,rath-er, ngeo-biopoliticalerms: pacebecomes'vital'- and ife becomesspatializedCavalletti, 005).Traditionalnterpretationsfthehistoryof mod-em geography ave ong emphasizedheinfluenc-es of a certain trand f SocialDarwinism n Rat-zel'stheoryof the state.These nterpretationsigh-lighted, nparticular,is idea of the survival f thefittest,stronglymarkedby evolutionary iologicaltheoriespopularat the time:an idea which envi-sioned he stateasanorganismhat asall otheror-ganisms)muststruggleo survive.Theadoption fan ecological-evolutionaryperspectivebroughtRatzel 1897)to affirm,moreover,he 'temporary'natureof all stateboundaries, incesubject o theongoing strugglefor space between competingstateactors.Thenotionof 'moveable rontiers'-asthese interpretationsf Ratzel'sopus intimatewas most stronglyassociatedwith the idea thatlargestates will 'naturally' xpandto reach theirnecessary ebensraum, ften into the territory fsurroundingweaker' smaller) tates.Here,Cavalletti'seadingdoes notdivergemuchfrom the tradition.His analysissuggests,indeed,that while Ratzel's work purports o transcendemptymetaphors,n practice he Germangeogra-pherenactsa grandrepresentationf the vital or-ganizationof the Earth:n his PolitischeGeogra-phie,the notionof state necessarilymimics ... theconstitutive ndunproblematizedelationship e-tween anorganism nd ts environment'2005,pp.206-207).Thestate,however,does not allow tselftobe boundwithinrigidconfines: Thediffusionofmen andtheirworkonthe surfaceof the Earthhasthecharacteristicsf a mobilebody hat,depending

on its ebb andflow,expandsandcontracts,bindsnew ties,breaks he old and, n doingso, takesonforms hatresemble hoseof other ociablebeings'(Ratzel,1897,p. 3).Cavalletti'sandAgamben'sconsiderations nthe mportancefRatzel'scontributionand,moregenerally, n thevitalroleplayedby geographicalknowledge n the constitution nd egitimation, swell as thefunctioning, f thebiopoliticalmachineof the state - are certainlyto be appreciated.wouldbe morecritical,however, f thereading iv-en by both to the influencesof Ratzel's work onNazigeographies f exception and,byextension,of the new, 'Atlantic' egimeof exceptiontoday.For while it is certainly ruethatRatzel s widelyconsidered o be the father f twentieth enturypo-liticalgeography, islegacy s muchmorecomplex- andambiguous thanmoststandardccounts l-low.According o FrancoFarinelli 1992,p. 110):

thepublication,n 1897,of Ratzel'sPolitischeGeographie,does not only mark,as is com-monly thought, hebirthof whatwe now termpoliticalgeography.At the very same time-and,alas,this is not aparadox [Ratzel'soeu-vre] marks he end of geographers' ecogni-tion of the politicalrole of every geography.But this is notRatzel'sfault.Quitetheoppo-site, for his geographyof the Stateproffereditself, uniquein the historyof geographicalthought,as the only truealternativeo stategeography ;a geographyhat,having ilentlyre-emergedrom its ashes in the second-halfof the1800s, woulddominate he entiredisci-pline untilwellaftertheSecondWorldWar.

ForFarinelli, hen,Ratzel shouldnot be seenpre-dominantlys the founder f the academic oliticalgeographyhatwoulddevelopnthesuccessivedec-adesbut, rather, s the last bourgeoisgeographerable/willing o admit he inescapablypoliticalna-tureofhiscognitive nterprise;he astto render x-plicit henexusbetweenhisconception f spaceandhisorganic heoryof the state.The deterministicn-terpretationf Ratzel'swork,Farinellinsists, s infactan 'invention' f French ociologyandhistorio-graphy2003,p. 108); headoption f the notionoflebensraum y Nazigeopolitical houghts, on theotherhand,a degenerationf thespirit hatguidesRatzel'swork,a tragicreinterpretationf the rela-tionshipbetweenspatial heoryandpolitics,a re-interpretationhatwouldrender xplicit hepoliticalnature f modemgeographynits mostvirulent nd



7/30/2019 4621536

11/18

CLAUDIO MINCA

violent terms.Cavalletti's ndAgamben'sassess-ment,whilerecognizing,n part, he geographer'scomplex legacy andresistingfacile characteriza-tionsregarding is determinism,till falls intothetrapof most conventionaleadingsof Ratzel.In-deed, herelationshipetween heRatzelian estureandwhatwe mayterm he'biopoliticalurn'of theEuropeanation-statemaybe read na different p-ticaltogether.nparticular,rancoFarinelli's1992,2003)theorizationsf thenature fbourgeois eog-raphyand its state of permanent risis can offersomeinteresting nterpretivevenueswhich allowus toinvestigatehe inksbetweenRatzel'sopusandthe dissolution f theEuropean omos hatso trou-bled CarlSchmitt another f Ratzel'sdevoted ol-lowers,who thanks hegeographern numerous c-casionswithinhiswritings).Muchhas been writtenabout hewaysin whichbourgeois eography initsroleasstategeography- adopteda geometricconcept of geographicalspace norder o reduce hecomplexity f the worldto the measureof its ownlanguage,andto professthe innocence of its representationssee, e.g.Farinelli, 2003; Minca and Bialasiewicz, 2004;Pickles,2004).It s thisveryconceptualrchitecturethatallows t to first orget and o make orget theideologicalthrustof Ratzel'spolitical theoryofspaceand, ater, o takeadvantagef thetragic eg-acyof thedegeneratedoption fRatzel's heorybyNazigeopolitical hetoricthoughnotpractice),oreinterprethe scientificmethod f Ratzel'sgeogra-phyasthough his latterwerepartof thesamepos-itivist raditionromwhich wentieth-centurystate'geography argelydrew ts inspiration.Ratzel husbecomes, n theofficialnarrative,ne of thefound-ers of geographical eterminism.Ratzel thusbe-comes,in the interpretationsf many, hefountofimperialistheories hatwould ustify,on the basisof amisreadingf hisconceptof lebensraum,erri-torialexpansion ndanevolutionaryeadingof re-lationsbetweenstatesandnations fora critique fsuchreadings ee Bassin 1987a, 1987b)aswell astheproceedings f the conference n thecentenaryof Ratzel's Politische Geographie:Antonsich et al.,2001).Certainly, he past decades havebroughtnewcritical impetus to interpretationsof Ratzel'swork. For instance,geographershave noted thatalthoughRatzel'sunderstandingf the territorialstateas an 'organism',markedby its own 'needs'and 'demands',was undoubtedly nfluencedbyevolutionarybiologicaltheories of the time, thisunderstandinglsohad mucholderroots.Indeed,

German dealistphilosophers uch as Hegel andFichtehadalsoregardedhe stateas ahavinga lifeof its own (Agnew,1998;Heffernan,2000). Oth-ers(see e.g. Bassin, 1987a, 1987b;Dijkink,2001)havestressed hatRatzel'sworkcan in no waybeconflatedwith purelymaterialistic andbiologi-cal) theoriesof thestate. For othersstill, Ratzel'sworkwasnotonlytobeseenas anoriginalreinter-pretation f the intellectual egacyof manyof hiscontemporaries,but his very conceptionof the'state as organism'shouldbe viewed partof 'abroadermodernpersonificationftheState',driv-ing theemergenceof nationalistdeologiesin thelate 1800s(see Raffestinet al., 1995,p. 25). Ac-cording o thisinterpretation,orRatzel,as for theearly heoristsof nationsandnationhood,he statewas a whole,a whole thatacts as one 'body'.Thisbody was a physical, geographicalbody - but itwas also the state's 'human'body:indeed,it wasthe decades of Ratzel's writings that also wit-nessedtheemergenceof notionssuchas the 'so-cial mass',thatwitnessed he 'birthof thecrowd'(Raffestin tal., 1995,p.25);wholes conceivedofas humanizedaggregatesendowed with a life oftheirown,aswell as acertaindegreeof conscious-ness andautonomy.Althought is usefultonote suchcontinuities,tis also importanto note thatthebodyof the Rat-zelian statewas characterized y mobile/tempo-raryconfines,placing hegeographern clearcon-trastwith the prevailingnationalistdeologiesofhis time. Ratzelwould insist, in fact, that stateswere and could only be fluid historicalentities.Moreover,while Ratzelstronglybelieved hatgeo-graphydeterminedtatebehaviour in particular,specifying hat,often,a state's success'was deter-minedby its location thisequationwas neverex-tended o humansubjects.Thisdistinctions vitaltounderstandingatzel'scollocationn thehistoryof thediscipline,as well as vis-ca-vishe evolutionofgeopolitical houghtnthecenturyhat ollowed,markedby more or less faithful nterpretationsfthegeographer's pus.Ratzel'swork, nfact,neverjustifieda racialdeterminism fortheLeipziggeo-graphert was space (andthe struggle or space),not raceornationality,hatwasthedriving orce ninternationalelations see Parker, 001).Farinelli(1992, p. 131), in particular, as re-markedhow Ratzelwasperfectlyconsciousof theimpossibility f anysocialsubject o claimknowl-edgewithout irstaffirming is (sic) legitimacyasa knowingsubject.Ratzel,according o Farinelli,was well aware of the necessityof a 'theoryof

396 @The author 006Journalompilation 2006 SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography


7/30/2019 4621536

12/18

GIORGIO GAMBENAND THENEWBIOPOLITICALOMOS

knowledge'abletoreconcilescienceand deology,andthat his wouldformthebasis of any theoryofgeographical pace.ForRatzel,as for HumboldtandRitterbeforehim, 'discourseprecedeswritingandcommandst, becauseknowingsignifies,firstof all,establishing elationsbetweenobjectsbasedonhypotheseshatprecedeanymap/text and hatno map/text s able to represent' 1992, pp. 134-135). In this sense, Ratzel'sconceptionof spacedistinguishes improfoundlyrompositivistgeog-raphy, espitehis oftenbeingpresented sone of itsmost influentialadvocates.ForRatzel, spacere-mains, n fact,aform of intuition:

[ForRatzel], he initial ask of thegeographeris that of "understandinghe conditions"(which may, indeed, be "objective")underwhose "influence pacebecomesa subjectiveformof intuition orus"; he conditionswhichproduceour individual onceptionsof space.Conditionswhich, f conceived .. specificallywithrespect ogeographicalpace .. refer o amuchbroader ndgeneralvision of the worldand heroleof the scienceof geographywithinit - to Ratzel'smind, .. coterminouswiththeattempto rationalize he sphereof thepoliti-cal'.

(Farinelli,1992,p. 135)ForRatzel,geographicalpacebecomessomethingessentially upra-local, omething bstract,eenastheproductnot of anunchangingandthus meas-urable)relationshipbetween immobilephysicalobjects,but rather he resultof a web of relationsbetweendynamic(albeitphysicallydetermined)politicalentities(Farinelli,1992,p. 136).Forthisreason,Ratzel bemoans the dependenceof geo-graphical epresentationsn cartographicalnes,andcontests hereduction f material,historicallyproduced,ivedspaces o thepuregeometries f themap: 'it is indeed the polemic against"geome-trism"asanovertlyreductive nd schematic nter-pretativemodel of geographical pace that bestcharacterizesthe Ratzelian oeuvre' (Farinelli,1992,p. 137).Ratzel,Farinelli2003,p. 125)sustains,s quiteconsciousof thefact hat he'geometrical'rammaris but a rhetoricalool- as effectiveas such a toolmaybe.Heis awareof the factthat heworld s notorderly, ndthat scientificknowledges simplyanorderly/ordering ay of knowing.This is why hedares oproposeanorganicheoryof the state andascientificheory fgeographicalpace o sustaint:

with Ratzel,for the firsttimeever,bourgeoisgeographywouldservenot associety'scritiqueof the Statebut, rather,t wouldbe the State,conceivedas "thegreatest f man'sworksupontheEarth",heculmination ofallphenomenaof thediffusion f life", hatwould,as supremesubject, laim all of geography.. Ratzel ries,infact,tolegitimize heexistence oftheState]in scientific erms;he doesnotdenythepoliti-calfunction f geographicalnowledge, utheseeksto adapt his roleto therequisites f thenewbourgeois rder, equisiteshatnow coin-cide,toutcourt,withthoseof the State tself.(Farinelli,1992,p. 141)

The complex historyof the Ratzelianconceptualuniverse eflects, ndeed,aformidableension. t isa tensionbetweenthe effortsof twentieth-centuryacademicgeography'smplicitparadigmo affirmits epistemologiesas coincidingwith the 'deepstructure' f geographical pace,on the one hand,and tsconcurrentttemptsomask tothepointofforgetting)hepolitical mpetusof such anopera-tion. The translation f Ratzel's hought nto 'nor-mal' geography and,morespecifically, nto 'po-liticalgeography') enderedpossibletheisolationof ageography ntrustedwith 'thepolitical' polit-ical geography,hat s) andthe remainder f geo-graphy, onceivedof from hatmomenton as neu-tral,scientific, a-political'.'Ratzels geography'sastindividual',Farinelli(1992,p. 140;emphasisadded)nsists,'an ndivid-ual,nonetheless,whois thefirst oclaim arole notonly vis a vis societybutalso the State;[but]anysuchindividuals, constitutively,n crisis'. Ratzelis markedby thiscrisis,and it is perhaps orthisreason hathislegacypassesdown o usinthe formthat tdoes. Vidalde laBlache astategeographerpar excellence is thefirst o aliment hemythofRatzel thedeterminist, myththatwill simplybereproduced cross the paradigmswhichtravelledthroughoutwentieth-centuryeography.t s with-in the shadowof thismyththat'geometrical' eo-graphicalpacehascolonizedourwaysof conceiv-ingthepolitical andeventhecritiqueso thisformof knowledge.However, sFarinelli1992,p. 147)remindsus, theexperienceof theNazi Geopolitiktragically emonstrateshat ahighprice spaid orthe expulsionfrom geographicalmemoryof theproblematicnatureof the nexusbetweenscienceandideology;the price of the reductionof geo-graphyto an immediateand declared deology'.Andof thereduction f geopolitics o biopolitics.



7/30/2019 4621536

13/18

CLAUDIO MINCA

The ghost of GeopolitikEventhoughCavallettis careful o notethatRat-zel's Politische Geographie should notbe conflatedwithNazibiogeographyrsimplyreduced othoseRatzelianpassagesadoptedby 'Hitler'sgeogra-pher'KarlHaushofer,he none the less maintainsthataccusingRatzelof determinism ndnational-ism becausehelinksapeopleto agiventerritorysmuchtoo simplistican interpretation. atzel,ac-cording o Cavalletti2005,p. 208), 'did not writePolitische Geographie in order to translate geo-graphical oncepts nto a national(ist) rojectbe-cause his biogeographywas alreadypolitical: henotionof the state as livingorganismwas alreadypresent n [Ratzel'sconceptionof] theoecumene'.If this is true,whatrelationcan we envisionbe-tween sucha contested nheritance, nd the affir-mationof themodemstate a state ackinga geo-graphical omosand ntentontaking oitsextremeconsequencesthe constitutiveambiguityof itsoriginary patialization?The Geopolitikexperiment s illustrativehere(Haushofer, 925).According o Farinelli,Haush-ofer is the directheirto - andmostfaithful nter-preterof - thepositivistgeography hatbecomesconsolidatedn the finaldecadesof thenineteenthcentury.Haushofers, indeed, the first o reveal tsforgotten ndhiddennature.All thewhile,howev-er,withoutbeingawareof doingso, forawarenessnecessitatesmemory;a memoryof which geo-graphical nowledgehadbeenstripped ythepos-itivistGeographie'Farinelli, 992,p.241).This sakeypassage nunderstandingherelationship e-tween the dissolutionof the geographicalnomosidentifiedby Schmitt,andthe emergenceof thespatialarchitecture f exception heorizedbyAg-amben.ReadingHaushofer sheir o thebourgeoisgeographical radition ignifies, indeed, locatinghis confusedgeographicalheorizing irmlywithinthe wombof thepoliticalculturehatproducedhedefinitive ndistinction etweengeopoliticsandbi-opolitics,nomosandphysis,zo"andbios.Perhapsthe mostscathing ritique f Geopolitik atesbackto 1929,writesFarinelli1992,p. 235),and t is thatof SigfriedPassarge:

who defined t as "thecircusof linguisticac-robatics".In this definitionwe can see thescorn of an academic geographer ... for theamateurhat s KarlHaushofer.AlthoughPas-sarge's udgementmay have been correct, twas foundedupon a mistakenassumption:

that[his]academicgeographywasascientificenterprise,while Geopolitikwas an ideo-logicalactivity as a motivated nd hus alse-ly objectiveknowledge.[And]it is preciselythe separation etweenGeographie ndGeo-politik that is the result (and, in analyticalterms,the reflection)of the definitiveaban-donment,n inter-warGermany, f all of geo-graphical nowledge o the realmof ideology.

And t is whengeography efinitively ffirmstselfas apoliticalpractice hat t laysopenthedoors tothecamp, allowing Geopolitikto enter and the mostviolentanddecisivesubjectof geographyand hepolitical) o emerge.If we agree with Farinelli's interpretation,Haushofer'sgeographyno longer appearsas anideologicalandpseudo-scientificegenerationhatmarksa breakwith the evolutionaryprogressofmodembourgeoisgeography.Quitethe contrary:Haushofer'sGeopolitikbecomes simply anotherproductof thedissolutionof theEuropeanerrito-rial nomos; an attempt- albeit doomed to failure -to granta theoretical-geographicaleneerto thetragicrevelation f theriftbetweennascitaandna-zione, between physis and nomos, thatthe Nazi bi-opoliticalmachinewouldquicklytake to its ex-tremeconsequences.Thegrandprojectof theGeo-politikwas nothingother,therefore, hanthe ex-treme (and thus tragicallybanal)expressionofbourgeois patialdeology hathere aysbare tsin-escapablypoliticalnature but that in doing so,comes to coincide with the political tout court,spawninga monster hatstill todaywe struggle orecognize as our own. Haushofer'sgeopolitics,Farinelli 1992,p. 237) insists,was aboveall are-searchagenda asfallaciousas it mayhavebeen).WhileforRudolfKjell6ngeopoliticswas nothingother han the doctrine f the Stateasageograph-ical organismor spatialphenomenon' in otherwords, hatwhichRatzelprescribed s the taskofpolitical geography),for Haushofer,Geopolitikwassomething ntirelydifferent: twasto become'the science of the formsof political ife existingwithinvitalnaturalpaces;ascienceseeking oun-derstand uch orms ntheirrelation fdependencewith terrestrial manifestations ... and historicaltransformations'Farinelli,1992,p. 237; on Kjel-len see alsoHoldar,1992).

Notby accident s theword 'Politik'precededby thatlittleprefix 'geo'. This prefixmeansmuchanddemandsmuch.Itrelatespoliticsto398 @The author 006Journalompilation 2006SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography


7/30/2019 4621536

14/18


the soil. It rids politics of aridtheories andsenselessphraseswhichmighttrapourpoliti-cal leaders ntohopelessutopias. tputsthemback on solid ground. Geopolitik demon-strates the dependence of all political deve-lopments on thepermanent reality of the soil.(Haushofer, 925,p. 33;emphasisadded)

Combininghe SocialDarwinist deasof his intel-lectualforefathersFriedrichRatzel (an influencethatwas, as I havearguedabove,farfromdirect)andRudolfKjellen, ogetherwiththe theorizationsof Mackinderwhomhe greatlyadmired),Haush-ofer argued hat n order o 'survive', he Germanstate wouldnecessarilyneed to achieve ts leben-sraum.More mportantly, aushofer imselfneverpromotedheracialdeterminismhatdistinguishedNazi 'science' (on this question see especiallyBassin, 1987a, 1987b;Heske, 1987, 1988, 1994).In Haushofer'sRatzelianunderstanding,t wasspace,notrace,thatwas the ultimatedeterminantof the destinyof the nation,and throughouthe1930sand1940sthe Munichgeographer ublishedmanyarticles hat were criticalof Nazi racialre-search. ndeed,within heoriginalvision of Haush-ofer's Geopolitik, 'it was not ideology ... that de-termined urwaysof thinking pacebut,quiteonthecontrary, patialrealities hatshapedourideo-logies'(Farinelli,1992,p. 238).Here aythe theo-retical nnovativenessftheGeopolitik roject;t isthus hat t attemptedo legitimize tsdistinct ormof scientificity.Farinellidoes notdenythe influenceof Ratzel'spoliticalgeography n Haushofer'shought; n in-fluencewithoutwhichthespatial heory hat ayatthe heartof Geopolitikwouldhavesimplynotbeenpossible.None the less, he notes that theways inwhichHaushofer dopts heorganic heoryof thestate,aswell asRatzel's cientificunderstandingfspace,do notrepresent nevolutionorelaborationof theLeipziggeographer'shoughtbut,rather,tsfalsification f not degeneration.For Ratzel, thestruggle orspaceandpositionarethe 'essence'ofthestate,nottheobjectof itsdominion, stheywillbecome for Haushofer nd theexpansionist eog-raphiesof the Reich.Haushofer'spatial heory snotonlyantitheticalo Ratzel'sconceptionbutalsomuchmoreingeniousandsimplistic;anddespiteits professed dynamism,essentiallystatic in itsconceptions Farinelli,1992,p. 244).Haushofermaybe Ratzel's llegitimateheir,buthe is also - if not above all - the offspring of nine-

teenth-century ourgeoisgeography,a rebelliousoffspringwhochosetooverturnhe established r-der between politics and knowledge that hadbroughtabout hetriumph f cartographiceason.Haushofer'sGeopolitiks born at the moment nwhich 'the scienticismof [academic]Geographie... shows tselfutterly ncapable f furnishing op-ularopinionwith the necessary deologicalrefer-encepoints hatwouldallow orthemobilization f[national]meaning exacted by [state] power'(Farinelli,1992,p. 248). Geopolitikbecomes ustthat:the first form of bourgeois geography de-claredly andexclusively dedicated to providing ide-ological supportto political power' (Farinelli,1992,p. 249;emphasis n theoriginal).Inthisoptic, tbecomes mpossibleo reduce heGeopolitikexperiment o simplyan episode,thefruitof anomalous istorical-politicalonditions. tis Haushofer's eography, arinellinsists, hatre-establishes he relation abandoned y nineteenth-century tategeography)betweenphysical,mate-rial space and the geometriesof geographicalspace, spacesmade to coincide n order o sustainthe politicalandideologicalneeds of the nation-state.The Geopolitik xperiment,n its arrogancereflecting hepowerof theReich,actually ndsupre-establishingheprimacy f thesubject f knowl-edgeover tsobjects: havingdisappearedrom heGeographie, ubmerged y the weightof the ob-ject, all thatremainedo the subjectwas to force-fully re-affirm itself (in ideological fashion)throughheGeopolitik, veritable"revenge f thesubject",[whose] geopoliticalvirulence was di-rectly proportional o its geographicalsilence'(1992,pp.243-244).Haushofer'sGeopolitik verturns,ndeed,eventhebourgeois ommonsensethatprecededRatzel:the assumption f the essentialfutilityof officialgeographicalknowledgefor political power.ForHaushofer1945), rather, eopolitics s drivenbythe need toproducemagesof theworld hatcanbeuseful to - andused by - leaders called to shapethepoliticaldestinyof theirpeople.It is this shift inperspective hat,followingon theheels of Ratze-lian organicism,producesa cognitivemonster:aformof geographical nowledgethat,on the onehand, ustifies tselfbyappealso the'objective v-idence' of scientificdiscourse,a discoursewhich,as we well know,reduceseverything o the samemeasure, hatis, to the horizontalgeometriesofgeographicalpace;on theotherhand,ageograph-ical knowledge hatmarries uchpretences o sci-entificitywiththecelebration f apeopleand ts in-

@Theauthor 006 399Journalompilation 2006SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography


7/30/2019 4621536

15/18

CLAUDIO MINCA

exorabledestiny, ranslatingRatzel'stheorizationof living spaceinto a culturalandpoliticalstate-mentaffirminghe superiority ndrightto exist-ence(asaworldpower)of the German ation. t ishere, indeed,thatGeopolitik'scrucialcontradic-tionlies:

havingaffirmed herespectof thenatural ndhistoricalattributes f certainspaces(callingforthe re-unification f a greaterDeutschlandas a morphological, ultural-linguisticndra-cial whole) in order o sustain heexpansion-aryaims of the state,[whilethis latter]as animperialist tate necessitatednstead hetotalannulmentof such attributeswithin an ab-stract and absolute space - the RatzelianRaum. (Farinelli,1992,p. 246)

Haushofermay speakof space, but he thinks ofplaces, Farinelli oncludes,and t is within his la-tentcontradictionhat herootof hisfailureies, aswell as theviolentlybiopolitical oot hatopens hedoors o thecamp, olet in thenormalizationf ex-ception.The violentreturn f thesubjectnHaush-oferiangeography preciselybecause of its con-tradictoryndhiddenbourgeoismatrix,becauseofitspretencesoscientificity vanishes nto heNazitanatopoliticalortex, nto the macabreriumph fthe spatializationf the structure f the ban,ren-dering tself,at theend,essentially utile.The mo-bile caesurathat cuts through he Germannationcanthus aterbe explained,ustifiedas a degener-ation- and not as therotten ruitof a structure fexception nauguratedlready ythemodembour-geois statewhich,at a certainpointin its history,abandonsts roleingrantingmeaningotheworld;that s, its very spatialontology.Towardsa new Nomos?Thedayafter herevelation f the torturesnflictedonthedetaineesof AbuGhraib,MassimoCacciari(2004),Venetian hilosopher ndcurrentMayorofthecity,writesa briefeditorialon the ItaliandailylaRepubblicantitled Iimaleradicale' 'AbsoluteEvil').Inhispiece,Cacciari omments nthebanalnatureof the 'evil' thatis beingrevealed n thosedaysto theeyesof all in sucha scandalousashionandurgesnot to consider he Abu Ghraib pisodeas somethingunthinkable,s something omehowremoved romus. The exceptionhas becomethenorm this is my reading f hisargument and n-

habitsourhousesandourstreets,nsofarastheper-manent tateof exception hat heWaron Terrorsattemptingo enactcorrespondso a multi-scalargeographyof nationaland individualbodies. Thewhereof thetortures husbecomesa keyfactor nunderstandinghebiopolitical egimeof exception(Gregory, 004a,2004b).We shouldthereforeask ourselveswhether hetanatopoliticalmachineput ntomotionbythe newstrategies f pre-emptivewarof the currentAmer-ican administration andby theexplicitbiopoliti-cal transgression f the norm- marks he emer-genceof a newsovereign ubject, et on imposinga new Geopolitik, geopoliticsof 'facts'and 'de-cisions', free of the bourgeoishesitationsthatbroughtabout the failure of Haushofer'sgrandproject. s whatwe arewitnessing oday,asAgam-benappearsoargue, heaffirmation f anew bio-politicalnomos,madepossiblesimplyby the ex-istence of sufficient orceto impose t and,moreo-ver,apolitical ubjectwillingtoadopt t,willingtoproduce permanentoneof indistinction etweenthespacesof thenormand hespacesof itssuspen-sion, of its (dis)application?Reflecting uponAmericangeo-biopoliticalexceptionalism odaycanperhapsprovideus with theopportunityo fi-nallycometo termswithourdisturbing roximityto the Naziproject, o findthecourage o confrontit once and for all and,especially, o ask,togetherwithGiorgioAgamben,howcan we avoid he cat-astrophic esultsof thisproximity'?InLapotenzadelpensiero,Agambenurgesus toreadKafka's hort toryDerBau, n which hewrit-er describes he obsession of an animaloccupiedwiththeconstruction f anunbreachableen;adenthat,as timepasses,reveals tself tobe atrapwith-outescape. But s thisnotpreciselywhathappenedto thepolitical paceofWestern ation-states', g-amben(2005, p. 327) askshimself,within which'the homes(thepatrie)that hese atterhavestrug-gledto buildhavebecome,at theend,for the"peo-ple" that were to inhabit them, simply deadlytraps?'Forthe Italianphilosopher,hetriumph fthebiopoliticaldimensionof this 'trap'marks hedemise of Westernpolitical space.In the modernera,Agamben 2005,p. 371) argues,Westernpol-itics conceivedof itself as the enactment f a col-lective historicalmissionor task(anopera)on thepartof a peopleor a nation.Sucha politicaltask,suchanopera,coincidedwithametaphysicalask;that s, withthe fulfilment f man's sic)purpose sa rationalbeing.But theproblems ntrinsic n thedetermination/identificationf this task emerge

400 @The author 006Journalompilation 2006SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography


7/30/2019 4621536

16/18

GIORGIO GAMBENAND THENEWBIOPOLITICALOMOSwith increasingforce with the end of the FirstWorldWar,when he nomosof theEarthwhichhadguided hepoliticalenters ntoa fatalcrisis,and heEuropean ation-state eginsto realizetheempti-ness of itshistoricalmission. n the mpossibility fdefininga new purpose, he nation-state nds upclaiming hereproductionndcontrolofbiologicallife itselfas itsultimate nddecisivehistorical ask.For this reason, t is a fundamentalmisunder-standingo conceiveof thegrandotalitarianxper-imentsof thepastcentury ssimplyputtingntoac-tion,albeit nextreme orm, he declaredmissionsof thenineteenth-centuryation-state:amely,na-tionalism and imperialism(Agamben,2005, p.328).As Ihave ried oargue hroughouthispaper,thedissolutionof thenomosof the Earthhas cor-respondednotonly to a politicalcrisisbutalso toa crisisof thenation-stateroject outcourt. nthissense,the totalitarianismsf thetwentieth enturyconstituteruly he other acetof theHegelian-Ko-jeviannotionof the 'endof history': Western'o-cietyappearso havereachedts historicalelosandall thatremains s aninevitabledepoliticizationfthesocial,enactedbytheunstoppableorcesof theeconomy- but alsoby thereconfigurationf bio-logicallife itselfasthesupremepolitical ask(Ag-amben,2005,p. 329).

In such an understanding,modern otalitarian-isms maybe conceivedof as the instauration, ymeansof the stateof exception,of a legalandper-manent tateof civil war;a civil war thatpermitsthephysicaleliminationnotonly of politicalene-miesbut alsoof wholecategoriesof citizenswho,for one reasonoranother,annotbe integratedntothe politicalsystem.It is thus that'thevoluntarycreationof a permanenttate of exception .. hasbecomeoneof theessentialpractices f contempo-rary states, even those popularly perceived as"democratic"'Agamben, 004,p. 11).The stateofexception hus tends to increasinglypresent tselfas the dominantparadigm f governancen con-temporary olitics,asa fundamental ndever-fluidthresholdof indeterminacybetween democracyandabsolutism.Atthisthreshold,hesovereign oes notonlyde-cidetheexception:he(sic)now,defacto,producesthesituation saconsequence f hisdecisionontheexception' Agamben,1995,p. 190; 1998,p. 170;see also2004,p.49).Thepermanenttateof excep-tion sthusnotadictatorshiputsimplya'space reeoflaw'(2004,p.68),and tisfor hisreason hatCarlSchmitt,alreadyn the 1950s,warnedagainst herisksof theexceptionbecoming henorm andex-

plicitlyaccusedAmericanoreignpolicyof havingalways readedheambiguousine ofexceptionalityandexception, huscontributingo theprogressivedismembermentf theEuropean omoswithout,atthe same time, proposing/imposingnother,pre-ciselywith he ntention fmaintaining globalspa-tial orderbasedwithin forcewithout ignificance',anorderwithout erritory.Whatwewitness oday s nota new uspublicumAmericanum,asedwithinanewAmerican omos,because he aimof thepermanenttateofexceptionis precisely hatof notdefiningastablerelationbe-tween political-juridicalrderand territorybut,rather,of alwayskeeping open the possibilityofplayingat the thresholdof indistinctionbetweenthe normand its (dis)application.The 'localizeddislocation' hat marksthe politicalparadigmofmodernityof whichAgambenspeaksis thus in-scribing geographywithavoid at tscentre,ageo-graphyackinganyspatial heory; geographyhatcontinually roduces nddismemberspaceswith-in whicheverythings, literally,possible.Inthesespaces,notonlyis everything llowed,but there-lationbetweennormandexception s basedupontheevent,not the order as on London'sUnder-ground hatwarmJulyday- thus eavingan enor-mous,previouslyunthinkablepaceto sovereigndecision,adecisionable omove,atwill,within heconfinesof the(dis)applicationf the norm.

Notes1. My adoptionhere of theconceptof 'bourgeois eography'echoesFrancoFarinelli's se of the term o refer o the Erd-kunde raditionseeFarinelli,1992)and,morespecifically,to itscritical enderingf modern patial heory.2. Usually(problematically)ranslated s 'potentiality' onthisquestion eeMinca,2005.3. The claim hatRatzel's geography f theState'provided nalternative patialtheoryto that advancedby (positivist)

'stategeographies' hatdominated he disciplineduringalargepartof the XX century s one of FrancoFarinelli'scentral laims n his criticalre-readingf thehistoryof thediscipline.This s notto say,nonetheless,hat heRatzelianvisionwastheonlysuch'alternative'nderstandingthoseyearsalso saw theemergenceof otherunderstandingshatfundamentallyhallenged he orthodoxyof the discipline,mostnotably hoseof Elisee Reclus 1894, 1905-08).Claudio MincaDepartment of GeographyRoyal HollowayUniversity of LondonEgham, SurreyUKE-mail:[email protected]

@The author 006 401Journalompilation 2006SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography


7/30/2019 4621536

17/18

CLAUDIOMINCA

ReferencesAGAMBEN, G. (1995): Homo sacer. Einaudi, Turin.AGAMBEN,G. (1996):Mezzisenza ine. BollatiBoringhieri,Turin.AGAMBEN, G. (1998): Homo sacer: sovereign power and bare

life,translatedyDanielHellerRoazen.StanfordUniversityPress,Stanford,CA.AGAMBEN,G. (2003):L'aperto.BollatiBoringhieri, urin.AGAMBEN,G. (2004):Statodi eccezione.BollatiBoringhieri,Turin.AGAMBEN,G.(2005):Lapotenzadelpensiero.NeriPozza,Vi-cenza.AGNEW, J. (1998): Geopolitics: Re-visioning World Politics.Routledge,London.AMAR,A., GRACIET,C., CHADI,T. andJAMAI,A. (2005):'MarocPoubellede la CIA',LeJournal 17-23 December):24-31.ANTONSICH,M., PAGNINI,M.P. andKOLOSSOV,V. (eds)

(2001): On the Centenary of Ratzel's Politische Geographie.Europe between Political Geography and Geopolitics, Soci-etAGeograficataliana,Rome.BASSIN,M. (1987a): Imperialismnd he nation tate n Frie-drichRatzel'spolitical eography', rogress n HumanGeo-graphy,11(4):473-495.BASSIN,M.(1987b): Racecontra pace:TheConflictBetweenGermanGeopolitik ndNationalSocialism',Political Geo-graphy Quarterly, 6 (2): 115-134.BUTLER, .(2002): Guantanamoimbo',TheNation,274(12):20-24.

BUTLER, J. (2004): Precarious Life: The Power of Mourningand Violence. Verso, London.CACCIARI,M.(2004): I1maleradicale',aRepubblica, May.CAPEL, H. (1987): Filosofia e scienza nella geografia contem-poranea.UNICOPLI,Milan.CAVALLETTI, A. (2005): La citta biopolitica. Mondadori, Mi-lan.

CHAMBRAUD, .(2005): Despayseuropeens ccusesdecol-lusionavec laCIA',Le Monde 18 November): .COWAN,R.(2005): Metchiefto face nquiry verDe Menezeskilling',Guardian, 9 November.DEMATTEIS, G. (1985): Le metafore della Terra. La geografiaumana tra mito e scienza. Feltrinelli, Milan.DIJKINK, .(2001): Ratzel's"politischeeographie"ndnine-teenthcenturyGermanDiscourse', n ANTONSICH,M.,PAGNINI,M.P.andKOLOSSOV,V. (eds):On the Cente-nary of Ratzel's Politische Geographie. Europe between Po-litical Geography and Geopolitics. Societh Geografica Ital-iana,Rome.DILLON,B. (ed.) (2002): 'GiorgioAgamben' special ssue),Paragraph, 25(2): 1-126.EDKINS, .,PIN-FAT,V. andSHAPIRO,M.J.eds) 2004):Sov-ereign Lives: Power in Global Politics. Routledge, London.FARINELLI,. (1992): segnidelmondo.La NuovaItaliaSci-entifica,Florence.

FARINELLI, F. (2003): Geografia. Un'introduzione ai modellidel mondo. Einaudi, Turin.GREGORY, . (2004a):The ColonialPresent.Blackwell,Ox-ford.GREGORY,D. (2004b): Theangelof Iraq',EnvironmentndPlanning D: Society and Space, 22: 317-324.HAUSHOFER, K. (1925): WhyGeopolitik?, in O'TUATHAIL,G.,DALBY,S. andROUTLEDGE, P. (eds) (1998): TheGeo-politics Reader. Routledge, London.HAUSHOFER, K. (1945): Defence of German Geopolitics, in

O'TUATHAIL, .,DALBY,S. andROUTLEDGE,. (eds)(1998): The Geopolitics Reader. Routledge, London.HEFFERNAN,M. (2000): Fin de siecle,fin dumonde?Ontheoriginsof European eopolitics,1890-1920', n DODDS,K.andATKINSON, D. (eds): Geopolitical Traditions.A Centu-ry of Geopolitical Thought.Routledge, London.

HESKE,H.(1987): KarlHaushofernHis Role n GermanGeo-politics and in Nazi Politics', Political Geography Quarterly,6 (2): 135-144.HESKE, H. (1988): 'Und morgen die ganze Welt...' Erdkunde-unterricht im Nazionalsocialismus. Focus Verlag, Giessen.HESKE,H.,(1994):KarlHaushofer,nO'LOUGHLIN,.(ed.):Dictionary of Geopolitics. Greenwood Press, Westport, CT.HOLDAR, . (1992): The deal tateand hepowerofgeographyin the ife andworkof RudolfKjellen',PoliticalGeography,11(3): 307-323.la Repubblica2005a): Lapolizia:"Estraneogliattentati'uo-mouccisonellametropolitana"',3 July,http://www.repub-blica.it lastaccessed:10January006).laRepubblica2005b): Sequestro ell'imamAbuOmar: hiestoI'arrestoer22agentiCia',23December, ttp://www.repub-blica.it lastaccessed: 3 December).la Repubblica2005c): 'SequestriCia, Berlusconi nsiste "Loripeto,non sapevamonulla"',7 December,http://www.re-pubblica.itlastaccessed: December).LESER,E., NOUGAYREDE,N. and STROOBANTS, -P.(2005): Sur apistedes activites achesde laCIAenEurope',LeMonde, 9 December):4-25.MINCA,C.(2005): ThereturnftheCamp',ProgressnHumanGeography, 29 (4): 405-412.MINCA, C. and BIALASIEWICZ, L. (2004): Spazio e Politica.CEDAM,Padua.NORRIS,A. (2003): Theexemplaryxception',RadicalPhilo-sophy,119: 11-40.

NORRIS,A. (2004a): GiorgioAgamben nd hepoliticsof thelivingdead',Diacritics,30(4):38-58.NORRIS, A. (ed.) (2004b): Politics, Metaphysics, and Death: Es-says on Giorgio Agamben's Homo Sacer. Duke UniversityPress,DurhamNC.PARKER,G.(2001): Ratzel, heFrenchSchooland he birth falternative eopolitics',in ANTONSICH,M., PAGNINI,M.P. andKOLOSSOV, V. (eds): On the Centenary ofRatzel'sPolitische Geographie. Europe between Political GeographyandGeopolitics. ociethGeograficataliana,Rome.PASSARGE, S. (1919): Die Grundlagen der Landschaftskunde.Friederichsen, amburg.PICKLES, J. (2004): A History of Spaces. Cartographic Reason,Mapping and the Geo-coded World.Routledge, London.

RAFFESTIN,C., LOPRENO,D. and PASTEUR,Y. (1995):Gdopolitique et histoire. Payot, Lausanne.RATZEL, F. (1897): Politische Geographie oder die Geographieder Staaten, des Verkehrs und des Krieges. Oldenbourg,Miinchen-Leipzig.RATZEL, F. (1907): La terra e la vita. Geografia comparativa.UTET, Turin (Die Erde und das Leben. Eine vergleichendeErdkunde. ibliographischesnstitut,Leipzig,1901-1902).RATZEL, F. (1914): Geografia dell'uomo. Antropogeografia:principi di applicazione della scienza geografica alla storia.Bocca, Turin (Anthropogeographie oder Grundzugeder An-wendung der Erdkundeauf die Geschichte. Engelhorn, Stutt-gart,1988).RECLUS, R. (1894): Nouvelle gdographie universelle: La terreet les hommes. Hachette, Paris.RECLUS, R. (1905-08): L'homme et la terre. Librairie Uni-verselle, Paris.

402 @Theauthor 006Journalompilation 2006SwedishSociety orAnthropologyndGeography


7/30/2019 4621536

18/18

GIORGIOAGAMBEN AND THE NEW BIOPOLITICAL NOMOS

SCHMITT, C. (1988): Le categorie del politico. il Mulino, Bolo-gna (Politische Teologie. Dunker & Humboldt, Berlin, 1922).SCHMITT, C. (1998): Il nomos della terra. Adelphi, Milan (DasNomos von der Erde. Dunker & Humboldt, Berlin, 1974).STAGLIANO, R. (2005): "'Una Guantanamo in Kosovo". Ladenuncia del commissario UE', la Repubblica, 26 Novem-

ber, http://www.repubblica.it (last accessed: 10 January2006).VIDAL DE LA BLACHE, P. (1903): Le Tableau de la gdogra-phie de la France. Hachette, Paris.VIDAL DE LA BLACHE, P. (1922): Principes de gdographiehumaine. Colin, Paris.


4621536

Documents